Film-Tech Cinema Systems
Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE


  
my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Operations   » Film Handlers' Forum   » Optical track matrixing. (Page 2)

 
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4 
 
Author Topic: Optical track matrixing.
Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999


 - posted 10-19-2002 06:50 PM      Profile for Tim Reed   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Scott's right. A print master is the 2:4 matrixed mix, on 35mm magnetic film (but usually DAT these days). It's the audio that is used to feed the sound camera.

quote:
How did that happen?

That's a good question.

quote:
By the way, there is Dolby Surround Mixing Manual available from Dolby as pdf.

Thank you, Michael. I believe that's for DVD and consumer products, but I'll pass this info along.

------------------
Better Projection Pays!


 |  IP: Logged

Michael Schaffer
"Where is the
Boardwalk Hotel?"

Posts: 4143
From: Boston, MA
Registered: Apr 2002


 - posted 10-19-2002 08:09 PM      Profile for Michael Schaffer   Author's Homepage   Email Michael Schaffer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
That`s right. The manual is for the consumer formats. Since the difference between cinema and consumer formats is basically the lack of noise reduction on the main channels, and a reduced version of B-type NR on the surround, but the channel configuration is the same, this is good reading for people interested in cinema mixing as well. It deals mainly with channel balance and also explains the basic functionality of the encoder/decoder.
Interesting detail: Since Dolby have been using the same decoder hardware for consumer and cinema products in recent years, the surround channel in analogue Dolby Stereo is also subjected to the same NR treatment as the consumer format in addition to SR.
I think Scott meant exactly what you said too. I misinterpreted his post as referring to 35mm 4-track.
The CP650 setup doesn`t offer the print master options anymore: Do Dolby not expect the processor to be used in recording studios?
Michael

 |  IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 10-19-2002 08:53 PM      Profile for Gordon McLeod   Email Gordon McLeod   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Yes the CP650 can do print masters

 |  IP: Logged

Michael Schaffer
"Where is the
Boardwalk Hotel?"

Posts: 4143
From: Boston, MA
Registered: Apr 2002


 - posted 10-19-2002 09:14 PM      Profile for Michael Schaffer   Author's Homepage   Email Michael Schaffer   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
How do you configure it? I could`t find the option in the formats pulldown menu nor in the manual. The software gives me a start with that buzz sound every time I open it.
Michael

 |  IP: Logged

Ray Derrick
Master Film Handler

Posts: 310
From: Sydney, Australia
Registered: Sep 2001


 - posted 10-20-2002 05:34 AM      Profile for Ray Derrick   Email Ray Derrick   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Just a small point that needs correction here. Gordy said: "..if there was a phase error in encoding or in the camera, it could decorrelate the signals enough to keep it as hard left and right, say equal level but a 90 degree shift".

Gordy, if the signal is encoded at equal level but with a 90 degree phase difference, the sound will appear in ALL channels at equal level. The matrix regards such a signal as "mid-field" so the steering is turned off. Addition (or subtraction) of 90 degree phase shifted coherent signals results in a 3dB loss, so all four channels will have identical output levels.

Small point I know but remember, accuracy!

In fact there is no way to get simultaneous left only and right only signals from the matrix (anybody's). Only one channel can be predominant at any one time. So Tim's original post intrigued me because it would be impossible to achieve, even with some kind of error. But he has since admitted there WAS centre, it just wasn't HARD centre. Remember the word, Tim - accuracy!

------------------
Ray Derrick
President/Chief Engineer
Panalogic Corporation Sydney, Australia
Phone: 61 (0)2 9894 6655 Fax: 61 (0)2 9894 6935


 |  IP: Logged

Ray Derrick
Master Film Handler

Posts: 310
From: Sydney, Australia
Registered: Sep 2001


 - posted 10-20-2002 06:46 AM      Profile for Ray Derrick   Email Ray Derrick   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I just received an e-mail from someone requesting that I not to be so critical of Gordy by telling him to be "accurate". I guess if one person took it this way there will be others, so here goes -

I have met Gordy, in fact had lunch with him and I must say I have very high regard for the man. In my opinion he is a skilled, very knowledgable and competent cinema engineer. He is also one hell of a nice guy into the bargain. My comments are intended as lighthearted and friendly and I am sure Gordy takes them that way. If I say something that is not quite correct I would expect Gordy or anyone else to correct me, hopefully also in a lighthearted way.

I guess my references to accuracy are really aimed (subliminaly) at people who experience problems with equipment. Taking just a little time to accurately diagnose (and report) a problem makes finding a solution that much faster and easier. I often read Brad saying something like "please give us more information so we can help you".

I should also mention that Australians (particularly me) tend to have slightly different (possibly even bizarre) sense of humour, compared with those residing on other parts of the planet. It comes from living on the underside of the globe where the earth is above your feet and the sky is below your head. Think about it.

Ray


 |  IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 10-20-2002 12:00 PM      Profile for Gordon McLeod   Email Gordon McLeod   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
True but in the early matrixs the 3 stage channel decoding took place before the surround decoding so it will appear in all 3 stage channel center being 3 db down but usually doesn't affect the surround as much. We had problems with azimuth in a head on a print master recorder that was out by a small amount. It produced the effect tim described

 |  IP: Logged

Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays

Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999


 - posted 10-20-2002 03:11 PM      Profile for Tim Reed   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
But he has since admitted there WAS centre, it just wasn't HARD centre. Remember the word, Tim - accuracy!

Hi Ray, I thought I did describe it accurately. I've said all along that it sounded like it was coming from L and R, which it did. I didn't say it was coming from L and R.

quote:
In fact there is no way to get simultaneous left only and right only signals from the matrix (anybody's). Only one channel can be predominant at any one time.

I appreciate everyone's input and expertise on this, really. I think the 70% value Gordon cited for the C and S channels was the key. The mix was out of proportion.

Thanks again!

------------------
Better Projection Pays!


 |  IP: Logged

Ray Derrick
Master Film Handler

Posts: 310
From: Sydney, Australia
Registered: Sep 2001


 - posted 10-20-2002 06:15 PM      Profile for Ray Derrick   Email Ray Derrick   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Don't mind the rest of us dragging this out Tim. We just like to chat.

Gordy I assume you are talking about the Cat110 Mono/Stereo optical card. Now that was very early in the piece and not a "real" matrix, more of an interim step, and a poor one at that. It used gain riding rather than addition/subtraction.

BTW the person that e-mailed me about Gordy has e-mailed again to say they were only joking. Sigh. See what I mean about differing senses of humour?

Ray


 |  IP: Logged

Gordon McLeod
Film God

Posts: 9532
From: Toronto Ontario Canada
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 10-20-2002 06:35 PM      Profile for Gordon McLeod   Email Gordon McLeod   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Yes but remember Dolby has always maintained a backwards compatability in encoding

 |  IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 10-20-2002 07:41 PM      Profile for Steve Guttag   Email Steve Guttag   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Ok...back from vacation.

I know I saw nothing on Ray's comments to take offense at...particularly since they were not aimed at me!

The backward compatibility thing only goes but so far...the 110/116 days and those tracks if played back on modern decoders will not sound the same as if played back on original equipment. The L and R vs C only ducted a small amount to each other to keep a hard center dialogue.

Now if you mean backward compatibility in the sense that a modern film will "play" on old equipment, then yes it will play but will sound nothing like what they heard in the studio.

Steve

------------------
"Old projectionists never die, they just changeover!"

 |  IP: Logged

Frank Angel
Film God

Posts: 5305
From: Brooklyn NY USA
Registered: Dec 1999


 - posted 10-21-2002 11:47 AM      Profile for Frank Angel   Author's Homepage   Email Frank Angel   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Matrix smatrix....there was none of these phantom channel problems before they killed 4 track mag. You wanted to put a sound in a single channel and nowhere else? You wanted to hear dialoge move where ever the actor is on the screen? 4 track mag, baby! Can we say DISCRETE?

 |  IP: Logged

Scott Norwood
Film God

Posts: 8146
From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas)
Registered: Jun 99


 - posted 10-21-2002 12:44 PM      Profile for Scott Norwood   Author's Homepage   Email Scott Norwood   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Frank: do you _enjoy_ hearing 12KHz switching tones whenever anything plays in the surround channel?

As much as I love 70mm 6-track mag, I really do think that 35mm 4-track mag is an idea whose time has come and gone. I'm sure it was great in the 1950s and 1960s compared to mono optical tracks, but I genuinely believe that matrixed Dolby SR optical tracks sound better than the mag prints that I have seen. (Of course, that isn't to say that 35mm 4-track mag wouldn't sound better if done today with modern heads and NR systems, but I've not heard a 35mm mag print made after 1970 or so.)

 |  IP: Logged

John Pytlak
Film God

Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000


 - posted 10-21-2002 01:57 PM      Profile for John Pytlak   Author's Homepage   Email John Pytlak   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
Scott said: "Frank: do you _enjoy_ hearing 12KHz switching tones whenever anything plays in the surround channel?"

When you get to be the age of Frank or myself, you don't even hear out to 12 KHz.

(Gone are the days when I heard the ultrasonic detectors used for traffic lights, harmonics from an ultrasonic film cleaner, or the high pitched whine of flyback transformers).

Flying small airplanes, high fader settings, and using a two-cycle rototiller in my garden without ear protection have evidently taken their toll.

------------------
John P. Pytlak, Senior Technical Specialist
Worldwide Technical Services, Entertainment Imaging
Research Labs, Building 69, Room 7525A
Rochester, New York, 14650-1922 USA
Tel: +1 585 477 5325 Cell: +1 585 781 4036 Fax: +1 585 722 7243
e-mail: john.pytlak@kodak.com
Web site: http://www.kodak.com/go/motion


 |  IP: Logged

Ray Derrick
Master Film Handler

Posts: 310
From: Sydney, Australia
Registered: Sep 2001


 - posted 10-21-2002 06:01 PM      Profile for Ray Derrick   Email Ray Derrick   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post 
I know what you are saying Frank. But despite it's limitations, the matrix was a very elegant solution to the problem of creating a multi-track format for optical soundtracks. All credit goes to Dolby for this idea.

Besides, a properly designed matrix in a correctly aligned system can fool probably 95% of a cinema audience into thinking they are listening to a discrete playback. It is only when the system malfunctions or there is an alignment problem that the conjuring trick is revealed.

------------------
Ray Derrick
President/Chief Engineer
Panalogic Corporation Sydney, Australia
Phone: 61 (0)2 9894 6655 Fax: 61 (0)2 9894 6935


 |  IP: Logged



All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4 
 
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:



Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.